Supreme Court agrees to hear watchdog's FOIA fight over Musk's DOGE records

What the court agreed to hear

On Tuesday, 13 October 2026, the US Supreme Court agreed to take up an appeal from the Trump administration. The appeal targets a federal judge's order that required the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to respond to information requests from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a watchdog group. The justices will decide whether DOGE falls under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and whether the administration can keep those records from the group. Arguments are expected early next year, with a ruling anticipated by the end of June.

How the case reached the justices

Washington-based US District Judge Christopher Cooper ordered the disclosures in April 2025, finding that DOGE likely counted as a government agency covered by FOIA. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declined to halt that order. In June 2025 the Supreme Court's conservative majority concluded that Cooper had ruled too broadly, and it directed the appeals court to narrow how much evidence had to be produced. An appeals court panel later sided with CREW, which argues the panel followed the justices' direction. The administration counters that the panel ignored the Supreme Court's call to weigh separation-of-powers concerns.

1. 2025-04Judge Christopher Cooper orders DOGE disclosures under FOIA
2. 2025-06Supreme Court reins in the lower-court order and narrows the evidence required
3. Jul 4, 2025DOGE announces in a social media post that its formal mission has ended
4. Oct 13, 2026Supreme Court agrees to hear the administration's appeal
5. Expected early 2027Oral arguments expected
6. Expected by end of JuneRuling expected

The dispute over what DOGE was

The administration says DOGE was an advisory body to the president, housed in the Executive Office of the President, and therefore exempt from FOIA. It maintains that DOGE made no decisions on program cuts or firings and only offered recommendations to agency leaders. CREW says DOGE was an agency with independent authority, and it points to the president's own statements as evidence of that authority. Critics have alleged that DOGE personnel, at least in some instances, dictated what agencies did. The administration also objects to a sworn deposition of DOGE acting administrator Amy Gleason, which it says the appeals court improperly allowed.

Justice Department lawyers put the administration's concern in their filing:

Subjecting advisory bodies to intrusive discovery triggers the very concerns that Congress sought to avoid by excluding presidential advisory bodies from FOIA's reach.

The wider record on DOGE

DOGE said it had slashed tens of billions of dollars in expenditures, but outside financial experts found those claims difficult to verify. Government Accountability Office auditors found that some reported savings from contract, grant and lease terminations were incorrect, lacked supporting evidence, or involved terminations already underway when DOGE was established. In September 2026, federal auditors reviewing how sensitive information was protected during DOGE's access to several federal systems said that, given limited information, "Congress and the public lack assurance that systems and data were protected." Musk, who backed Republican candidates and Trump in the 2024 election, led DOGE initially and left the role after a few months. He later fell out with Trump over the cost of the president's tax and spending bill.

What comes next

The court is expected to hear arguments early next year and to rule by the end of June. The justices will examine how much evidence DOGE must produce about its exact role. The administration argues the information is privileged, while CREW says it is critical to advancing public knowledge of DOGE's actions. The issue has already reached the Supreme Court once on an interim basis.